If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Yes, it's common in the U.S., and all my contracts have had it in one form or another. But doesn't mean what many seem to think it means, at least with, good, large publishers. No publisher, no good publisher, is ever going to make you pay for a legal read. They don't need to do so. It's automatic, and they already have an attorney who checks the book.

And this provision is really in place for those times when the writer actually does something wrong, such as knowingly lying to the publisher, and in the book, or commits plagiarism.

Contract or no contract, the publisher agreed to publish the book, and this makes them just as culpable as the writer, unless the writer knowing did something the publisher could not reasonably know he did.

Thanks for the information--what you're telling me is pretty much the way I understood things to usually work.

I've never heard of that sort of contract provision before. Does anyone know if it is also standard in the US? Or is this a US/UK difference? (I do know that libel law in the US and UK is quite different.)

It does, as JAR points out, seem to be as prevalent in the USA as in the UK, but as he also suggests I've never seen it invoked before. I work mainly in children's books so there aren't usually too many legal issues, and the one time I did have to get a legal read done we paid for it.

(I seem to remember there was also a clause in that contract which put a cap on the amount of money we'd pay for permissions - picture licenses etc - and we did in fact enforce that, on the basis that if the author really wanted a few extra pics over and above what we'd budgeted for it'd have to come out of his own pocket. We were very up-front about it. These kinds of things need to be discussed thoroughly before the contract is signed.)

My memoir features real names of people, places and organizations. I only changed the names of my immediate family (for privacy) and two bosses because they didn't look so good. However, I did not write anything malicious about them; they were all my real experiences which can be easily proven.

My publisher asked me to remove a whole section and revise parts about one of my employers because of a potential lawsuit. I complied as it did not compromise the story. Not much, anyway.

If there was going to be a problem with the use of names, I would have heard about it by now given that the two companies in question are big players in North America - Four Seasons and Carlson Hotels Worldwide.

I believe as long as there is no malice or malicious intent, you're fine. There are several threads on this topic on AW and the Net so best to read whatever you can before your submit or publish your ms.

I only changed the names of my immediate family (for privacy) and two bosses because they didn't look so good. However, I did not write anything malicious about them; they were all my real experiences which can be easily proven.

My publisher asked me to remove a whole section and revise parts about one of my employers because of a potential lawsuit. I complied as it did not compromise the story. Not much, anyway.

I see the point of changing names to protect privacy. Is this a case where you would say your book was inspired by a true story rather than based on a true story?

I see the point of changing names to protect privacy. Is this a case where you would say your book was inspired by a true story rather than based on a true story?

I called it a memoir and say it is a true story in the Author's Note which appears on the first page. Just to give you an idea, here's what I said about changing some names - it really is very simple. You'll need to click on the "Look Inside" message at the top of the book and scroll down just a wee bit.

Originally Posted by veinglory

If only a few names are changed I think you can continue to just call it non-fiction (just: a true story). The veracity is in the events.

Yup, exactly what I did and what I found on similar threads on AW last year.